Page 27: of Marine Technology Magazine (May 2012)

www.seadiscovery.com eral years behind schedule, the 1,000 MW target remains a State goal. Last summer, the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (NJBPU) launched stakeholder proceedings on imple- mentation of the State?s Offshore Wind Economic Development Act (OWEDA). One of those hearings explored various methods for funding the state?s Offshore Wind Renewable Energy Certificates (ORECs). Despite the NJBPU activity, uncertainty pervades the OREC market. In Maryland, Governor O?Malley pledged support for the Maryland Offshore Wind Energy Act of 2012 that would establish an OSW ?set-aside? within Maryland?s Renewable Portfolio Standard. The proposed bill would require regulated utilities to comply by developing or purchasing ORECs by 2017. The OREC model comes after last year?s attempt at similar OSW legislation that centered on long-term (25+ years) power purchase obli- gations. That bill largely failed as a result of cost con- cerns. States like Virginia have not pursued the OREC model but are more reliant on investor-owned utilities developing OSW when prices become more competi- tive. What are the Remaining Impediments to Offshore Wind? A number of economic and regulatory barriers need to be surmounted for OSW to achieve its potential to pro- vide an abundant source of clean energy and to mitigate climate change.EconomicsOne reason the U.S. has not developed OSW to date is that the economics of OSW are not currently attrac- tive. The installed capital cost of OSW is materially higher than onshore facilities and OSW requires com- paratively higher operation and maintenance costs since OSW facilities at sea are more difficult to access and maintain. The economics of OSW can be materially enhancedby government incentives and the liquidity of markets for commodities the OSW produces (i.e., renewable energy and renewable energy certificates (RECs). The production tax credit (PTC) and the Section 1603 cash MTR#4 (18-33):MTR Layouts 4/27/2012 1:21 PM Page 27